I know, I know. Hes currently slated as a 2nd round pick. But, Lacy is big, fast and strong. He fits the mold of the RBs MM looks for in our offense, plus he follows in - looks the part of - the long line of Alabama RBs like Mark Ingram and Trent Richardson. In short, he is gonna rise, and I think he will rise all the way up to #26.

Our offense needs balance, we NEED to be able to run the football. Eddie Lacy very well could be the BPA and the one true difference-maker when we pick at #26.

I recognize that I am projecting, but I think we are all gonna look a lot differently at Lacy come April than we are right now.

I get a feeling about this guy and I would love to see him in GB. Great size, speed and hands. Flashed greatness at San Diego St. on a pretty mediocre team. I know he needs some polish, but he could end up being the man.

Some depth at FB could be used and Wilson is the best lead blocker in the country. We seem to struggle in short yardage situations, and the thought of giving Kuhn the ball and putting Wilson in as a blocker might remedy this problem.

Consistent 75% FG kicker in college has hit beyond 50 yards several times throughout his career. A good prospect to challenge Crosby for his starting job._________________
Thanks packerbacker87 for the sig!

Second that on Lacy. I think he's a power scheme guy and not as good as his OL made him seem either. I think shoving him up to Green Bay in the first round is awful value and a bad reach. He's a mid-late 2nd round guy at best. Even at that, if he was there at the Packers 2nd round pick, there are a handful of RBs I like more in Green Bay._________________

Wilfred wrote:

Memory is like the Packers when they are behind by two touchdowns in the 4th quarter... It comes back.

I'm having a very hard time following your big board logic, so you have Uzzi as one if your top 100, but not Escobar? I disagree with your board a lot just based off of that observation alone.

I echo the above complaints of Lacy, please, not in the first. He offers very little different than some of the other backs available later. Too much hype on that train daintrain.

I caution anybody selecting a FS this year, do we really want Burnett sliding over to SS? He is not very good in that role and is best when he is back in coverage. I think we should be looking for a solid tackler with good instincts shallow. Right now we have Woodson that excels in that role but no one else that excels at that role. I would like an upgrade at FS too because Burnett has been average in that role. Problem is I don't see an upgrade in year 1 in this draft at the FS position in this defense over Burnett.

I'm having a very hard time following your big board logic, so you have Uzzi as one if your top 100, but not Escobar? I disagree with your board a lot just based off of that observation alone.

I echo the above complaints of Lacy, please, not in the first. He offers very little different than some of the other backs available later. Too much hype on that train daintrain.

I caution anybody selecting a FS this year, do we really want Burnett sliding over to SS? He is not very good in that role and is best when he is back in coverage. I think we should be looking for a solid tackler with good instincts shallow. Right now we have Woodson that excels in that role but no one else that excels at that role. I would like an upgrade at FS too because Burnett has been average in that role. Problem is I don't see an upgrade in year 1 in this draft at the FS position in this defense over Burnett.

Burnett is an average FS, but an above average SS. Especially when he comes down hill in the running game, that's his big difference. He's only average in coverage as a FS, but as far as SS, he's on of the better ones in the game. Burnett looked really good next to Collins, I know we probably won't find Collins again, but adding a CF type will help Burnett immensely._________________

I'm having a very hard time following your big board logic, so you have Uzzi as one if your top 100, but not Escobar? I disagree with your board a lot just based off of that observation alone.

I echo the above complaints of Lacy, please, not in the first. He offers very little different than some of the other backs available later. Too much hype on that train daintrain.

I caution anybody selecting a FS this year, do we really want Burnett sliding over to SS? He is not very good in that role and is best when he is back in coverage. I think we should be looking for a solid tackler with good instincts shallow. Right now we have Woodson that excels in that role but no one else that excels at that role. I would like an upgrade at FS too because Burnett has been average in that role. Problem is I don't see an upgrade in year 1 in this draft at the FS position in this defense over Burnett.

~My friend, I am not yet putting together a big board, I am merely trying to learn about prospects. I will put out a mock draft where I call my shot, but that will be one of my last ones.
~Uzzi is a prospect I am intrigued by and I am merely trying to gain reasonable insight from people about him. He is tough and nasty, with adequate strength and great athleticism. We are in desperate need of someone to take on the role EDS did last year and I think that guy could be Uzzi.
~Additionally there is value for Uzzi because he's one of the only mid-to-late players who can play that position, and yet develop down the road to take on of the three interior spots. There are all kinds of TE prospects.
~Burnett is not cut out for SS, are you crazy?! Burnett is tailor-made for SS, he's not a very good FS.
~I hear people's dissension with Lacy. Maybe I am buying into the hype too much. I disagree with the sentiments though that he can't run in a ZBS. I am just trying to find that off in left field prospect that TT seems to draft every year. Thought it was worth a shot at Lacy._________________
Thanks packerbacker87 for the sig!

I'm having a very hard time following your big board logic, so you have Uzzi as one if your top 100, but not Escobar? I disagree with your board a lot just based off of that observation alone.

I echo the above complaints of Lacy, please, not in the first. He offers very little different than some of the other backs available later. Too much hype on that train daintrain.

I caution anybody selecting a FS this year, do we really want Burnett sliding over to SS? He is not very good in that role and is best when he is back in coverage. I think we should be looking for a solid tackler with good instincts shallow. Right now we have Woodson that excels in that role but no one else that excels at that role. I would like an upgrade at FS too because Burnett has been average in that role. Problem is I don't see an upgrade in year 1 in this draft at the FS position in this defense over Burnett.

~My friend, I am not yet putting together a big board, I am merely trying to learn about prospects. I will put out a mock draft where I call my shot, but that will be one of my last ones.
~Uzzi is a prospect I am intrigued by and I am merely trying to gain reasonable insight from people about him. He is tough and nasty, with adequate strength and great athleticism. We are in desperate need of someone to take on the role EDS did last year and I think that guy could be Uzzi.
~Additionally there is value for Uzzi because he's one of the only mid-to-late players who can play that position, and yet develop down the road to take on of the three interior spots. There are all kinds of TE prospects.
~Burnett is not cut out for SS, are you crazy?! Burnett is tailor-made for SS, he's not a very good FS.
~I hear people's dissension with Lacy. Maybe I am buying into the hype too much. I disagree with the sentiments though that he can't run in a ZBS. I am just trying to find that off in left field prospect that TT seems to draft every year. Thought it was worth a shot at Lacy.

It's not that Lacy CAN'T do ZBS, but it'd take him out if his strengths. Bernard, Taylor, and Ball are more ZBS guys and are round 2 (Bernard) or round 3 guys._________________

I'm having a very hard time following your big board logic, so you have Uzzi as one if your top 100, but not Escobar? I disagree with your board a lot just based off of that observation alone.

I echo the above complaints of Lacy, please, not in the first. He offers very little different than some of the other backs available later. Too much hype on that train daintrain.

I caution anybody selecting a FS this year, do we really want Burnett sliding over to SS? He is not very good in that role and is best when he is back in coverage. I think we should be looking for a solid tackler with good instincts shallow. Right now we have Woodson that excels in that role but no one else that excels at that role. I would like an upgrade at FS too because Burnett has been average in that role. Problem is I don't see an upgrade in year 1 in this draft at the FS position in this defense over Burnett.

~My friend, I am not yet putting together a big board, I am merely trying to learn about prospects. I will put out a mock draft where I call my shot, but that will be one of my last ones.
~Uzzi is a prospect I am intrigued by and I am merely trying to gain reasonable insight from people about him. He is tough and nasty, with adequate strength and great athleticism. We are in desperate need of someone to take on the role EDS did last year and I think that guy could be Uzzi.
~Additionally there is value for Uzzi because he's one of the only mid-to-late players who can play that position, and yet develop down the road to take on of the three interior spots. There are all kinds of TE prospects.
~Burnett is not cut out for SS, are you crazy?! Burnett is tailor-made for SS, he's not a very good FS.
~I hear people's dissension with Lacy. Maybe I am buying into the hype too much. I disagree with the sentiments though that he can't run in a ZBS. I am just trying to find that off in left field prospect that TT seems to draft every year. Thought it was worth a shot at Lacy.

Dain,

I see a lot of value in Uzzi, I know the player well, however I do not have him as a top 100 prospect, his value comes after that. I think Escobar is a top 100 player. That is the reason for my confusion where you are drafting these prospects sometimes. Your board, or lack of it in this case, is noticable once you put players in some slots.

I will disagree with anyone here on Burnett as a SS over FS for reasons I put in another thread. I have no problem maintaining my minority opinion on that until proven wrong. If the Pack decide to keep Burnett in a SS role going forward, I will hope his play persuades me otherwise as well. Right now, I have to agree to disagree with the others on this evaluation of his play and his strengths.

I just want to say I disagree about Lacy. I have very little doubt he could pull the fit. I would not fight anyone about better value being on the board with fit in hand. But I would not say Lacy can't to prove that point. Lacy is a value push there but he can play in most any fit. The ZBS was just not made for him, a la Ball ect.

That all said, I'm not a real big fan of this one at large.

26) Lacy is a value issue there, though he is on the safe side and the Packers sure as hell hold a need there. Guess I would not cry about it.

5 I'm all in on Thomas if he runs well enough to pull the fit.

60) I would be 50/50 on Long there in this Packers fit. He would have a hard time playing the guard fits here at that height. Plays short armed at tackle, though he has the movement skills to excel at fit. Push pick for me but the kid has some real upside. I would like him a good bit more in fit if he was two inches shorter. Don't really view tackle as a need either. Guess I'm OK with it pending how this staff feels about Sherrod at the time of the pick. Fact is, he got a med clear to play this season. Should be full go! If there are any doubts though, I'm game on Long and could see him as board value if that was the case with Sherrod.

90) I'm a Uzzi guy and feel some teams(skins/texans) will frickin love him. Fact is that boy is very raw in pass pro coming out of that system. Some risk there but it could pay off down the road with good coaching and a young man that is willing. Still, it's going to be hard for a pass heavy team like Green Bay to hand in that card. That kid sure will get after it though!!!!

126) Escobar would be a steal there! Sadly, I highly doubt he is still on the board there if he runs that sub 4.7 forty. One of the better fits in this draft class though. Mac could do some things with that set.

134) King needs a ton of work but I like that set in system. Hands are just OK though and he is not very savvy. Kid better be able to beat press at the next level or his game as it stands today will NOT work.

164) No issue with Klein if the slot is right. At the very least you have one hell of a ST's player there. Kid will do what it takes!

I just want to say I disagree about Lacy. I have very little doubt he could pull the fit. I would not fight anyone about better value being on the board with fit in hand. But I would not say Lacy can't to prove that point. Lacy is a value push there but he can play in most any fit. The ZBS was just not made for him, a la Ball ect.

That all said, I'm not a real big fan of this one at large.

26) Lacy is a value issue there, though he is on the safe side and the Packers sure as hell hold a need there. Guess I would not cry about it.

5 I'm all in on Thomas if he runs well enough to pull the fit.

60) I would be 50/50 on Long there in this Packers fit. He would have a hard time playing the guard fits here at that height. Plays short armed at tackle, though he has the movement skills to excel at fit. Push pick for me but the kid has some real upside. I would like him a good bit more in fit if he was two inches shorter. Don't really view tackle as a need either. Guess I'm OK with it pending how this staff feels about Sherrod at the time of the pick. Fact is, he got a med clear to play this season. Should be full go! If there are any doubts though, I'm game on Long and could see him as board value if that was the case with Sherrod.

90) I'm a Uzzi guy and feel some teams(skins/texans) will frickin love him. Fact is that boy is very raw in pass pro coming out of that system. Some risk there but it could pay off down the road with good coaching and a young man that is willing. Still, it's going to be hard for a pass heavy team like Green Bay to hand in that card. That kid sure will get after it though!!!!

126) Escobar would be a steal there! Sadly, I highly doubt he is still on the board there if he runs that sub 4.7 forty. One of the better fits in this draft class though. Mac could do some things with that set.

134) King needs a ton of work but I like that set in system. Hands are just OK though and he is not very savvy. Kid better be able to beat press at the next level or his game as it stands today will NOT work.

164) No issue with Klein if the slot is right. At the very least you have one hell of a ST's player there. Kid will do what it takes!

I could not use a pick on the last two.

Well thanks for the thoughtful insights.

~I agree with you about Lacy, I scoff at this idea that he cannot play in the ZBS, it is just plain silly. You have to cut, which Lacy has demonstrated more than an ability to do so, after that, it is just football. Lowering your shoulder and running over ppl is a plus, not a minus.

~You say it's all about value with him, I agree right now it doesn't appear he is worth a 1st round pick. However, is it really that much of a stretch to think he couldn't creep up into the end of the 1st round? I look for guys that could be difference makers, I really don't think it is that much of a stretch to think Lacy could be that guy.

~Thomas led the nation in INTs last season, I have hard time thinking that he could do that with that slow of a 40 time. The website I get that from estimates 40 times. They've been relatively accurate, but sometimes WAY OFF. I will bet he ends up in the 4.4 range.

~Here's my issue with Sherrod. Mike Mayock - who is one of the few analysts whose opinion I respect - pointed out when we drafted Sherrod that he was probably a three year project and can only play LT. I think that opinion was validated when he was soundly beaten out at LG by Lang. I wonder if Sherrod is ready to be a starter next year. I just don't think we cn afford to have Newhouse starting at LT another year and would like to have a backup plan for LT in case Sherrod needs more time to develop.

~I hear you about Uzzi, and I am not expecting him to start today. He becomes the new EDS IMO and will take over 2-3 years down the road. He is essentially a nastier, more talented EDS.

~Well, you maybe right about Escobar. It seems to me that if we don't go TE in Round 1, we are gonna be kinds screwed in the TE area. Depending on how high of a DP we get for Jennings, maybe we could snag Ertz in Round 2.

~I know King is a project, but I think it's fair to say, he is gonna be our 4th WR.

Anyways, that's how I see it._________________
Thanks packerbacker87 for the sig!

One could make a very strong case that a Lacy might make the most "impact" of any possible first round pick this year. Hard to fight ya on that line of thinking to tell the truth. I'm just a little old school when it comes to grading out RB's. I don't hand out first round grades there unless I truly feel they are special. Lacy could be very good, I don't see special.

I agree and disagree with Mayock on Sherrod. I do feel that was a left tackle only. But I did not feel he was a three year project. Hell, good chance he would have taking over that starting spot the tail end of his rookie year if not for the injury. That's a very bright, hard working young man though. I'm not a fan of that general mindset and did not love the body(high hipped) but would be the first to tell you Sherrod has the most god given talent of any lineman on this Packers team. Kids going to get his look. That's my issue with all the Fluker talk right now. You only draft Fluker if you plan to start him day1 at RT and keep him there. In that, good chance Lang ends up being the odd man out with Bulaga moving to guard because Sherrod can only play LT and should get his look. Ends up being a real value push unless the board is VERY right for Fluker. You can get a Moses or Wagner a round or two later, pull off the same thing, and at much better value. Know what I mean?_________________

In that, good chance Lang ends up being the odd man out with Bulaga moving to guard because Sherrod can only play LT and should get his look.

I've heard some people speculate that Lang would make a darn good center, though I'm not sure what that speculation is based on.

Do you disagree?

I'm sure the man can snap a football. Bet it would take a little longer than some think for him to be "darn good" there though. Outside of a few preseason snaps the man has NEVER played the position. Playing center in Mac's fit is no easy task either. Good chance he would need to lose some weight to pull the fit at a high level.

In short, good chance he would bring ya better value on the trade market if that played out._________________